YOUR AD HERE — REACH DISCERNING READERS OF SERIOUS JOURNALISM
Rates upon inquiry. Clowns extra.
FACT CHECK✒ EDITORIALABSURDITY:
Flight Simulators: FAA Should Take Steps to Ensure Oversight Efforts Address Increased Workload
Filed 16h ago · Via GAO · The Buffoon Desk
THIS STORY IS SCORED
Manic Polka
Kevin MacLeod · incompetech.com · CC BY 4.0
Photo: Thomas Schmidt (NetAction) · CC BY-SA 3.0 · via Wikimedia Commons
A GAO review found the FAA's simulator count grew more than 500% from 1990 to 2025 while staffing at its National Simulator Program stayed flat. To cope, the agency stretched evaluation intervals from 12 months up to 36 months for simulators deemed consistently high-performing, but six of ten sponsors GAO interviewed said the FAA hasn't explained how those eligibility calls get made.
Two sponsors specifically flagged potential safety concerns tied to the longer gaps between checks. GAO also found the program has unaddressed skills gaps, including in standards development, and recommended the FAA build better communication with sponsors and close the mission-critical gaps; the Department of Transportation agreed.
The full dispatch is available from the source below.
✒ FROM THE EDITORIAL DESK
Stretching the time between checkups from one year to three sounds fine right up until someone asks how that call gets made, and the answer turns out to be nobody outside the agency really knows. Airlines that own the machines are left guessing at the FAA's homework, which is an odd way to run a program whose whole job is making sure the simulator matches the plane. Agreeing to fix it is easy; explaining the math to the people who asked twice already is the part that's been skipped.
